- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: PT Atty's - deep dive into the "4 of you think it's A, 4 think it's B and 4 think it's C"
Posted on 5/31/24 at 11:51 am to Timeoday
Posted on 5/31/24 at 11:51 am to Timeoday
quote:
So if another person who does not like you pleads guilty to a crime, you can be found guilty because your transactions are related to the crime the person who despises you pleads guilty to.
No.
Why are you under the impression that it has anything to do with whether or not somebody likes you?
If someone is making illegal payments and sends you invoices for that service, and then you sign checks for those payments with those invoices attached, then you can be prosecuted whether you and the other person like each other or not. The paper trail ties you to the crime.
1
Posted on 5/31/24 at 11:56 am to Zachary
quote:The concealed crime was election interference in violation of New York Election Law § 17-152.
That graphic does zero to explain the alleged "other crime." Just like the indictment.
The jury instructions stated: "any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of conspiracy to promote or prevent an election.”
Posted on 5/31/24 at 11:57 am to Willie Stroker
quote:
Willie Stroker
You're twisting yourself into a lot of knots to defend a clearly biased judge.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:00 pm to Salviati
quote:
The concealed crime was election interference in violation of New York Election Law § 17-152.
How exactly were payments made by Cohen to Clifford in 2017 going to influence the 2016 election?
Are you one of the "Trump is a time traveler" sorts?
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:05 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
If someone is making illegal payments and sends you invoices for that service,
What was illegal about the payments? Didn't Congress have a "hush money slush fund" where the same was done? And if the payments were "illegal" why is Stormy having to pay Trump for violating an NDA?
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:07 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
Found the dumbass who just makes up shite to cloud the judgment of other people trying to genuinely understand factual information.
What factual information? The judge is making it up as he goes.
Here's your factual information:
1. The DA ran on a platform of getting Trump
2. The DA created a legal interpretation out of thin air to turn expired misdemeanors into felonies
3. Even with the bullshite interpretation, he didn't disclose what crime was committed that is required for this prosecution
4. The judges daughter works for and raises money for Trump's political rivals
5. The judge refused to allow Trump's attorneys to mount a proper defense
6. The judge told the jury that they didn't have to agree on which crime was committed to find him guilty
7. The judge allowed irrelevant testimony for the sole purpose of damaging Trump
8. 99% of legal experts from all political perspectives say it is bullshite (I exaggerate to clarify)
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:10 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
n determining whether the defendant conspired to
promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office
by unlawful means, you may consider the following: (1) violations
of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA;
(2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of
tax laws.
Are those federal or state statutes?
Since they are absolutely federal statutes, how is it a local city DA able to bring federal charges???
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:18 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
We know there was another crime related to these transactions because Michael Cohen pled guilty to it and served time for it
Cohen previously stated Trump had no knowledge of the above mentioned "crime".
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:24 pm to Zachary
quote:
You did not even put the defendant on notice of what the alleged other crime was.
You did not require the jury to articulate what it was.
You did not require the jury to be unanimous about it in its guilty verdict.
Great. Put that in your appeal. I'll give the Appellate Court a heads up to check their mail.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:30 pm to VoxDawg
quote:First, Cohen made the payment to Clifford in 2016, prior to the election.quote:How exactly were payments made by Cohen to Clifford in 2017 going to influence the 2016 election?
The concealed crime was election interference in violation of New York Election Law § 17-152.
Are you one of the "Trump is a time traveler" sorts?
Second, although he lost, Trump was a candidate in the 2020 election.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:33 pm to bbvdd
quote:New York Election Law Section 17-152: “Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”
Are those federal or state statutes?
Since they are absolutely federal statutes, how is it a local city DA able to bring federal charges???
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:33 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
You're twisting yourself into a lot of knots to defend a clearly biased judge.
No, he is actually providing a pretty straight forward, understandable explanation of the technicalities of the case. Which is simply helpful and shouldn’t be viewed as contentious.
The truly inflammatory issue of the case is whether it was selective prosecution for political reasons.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 12:59 pm to Lg
quote:
What was illegal about the payments? Didn't Congress have a "hush money slush fund" where the same was done? And if the payments were "illegal" why is Stormy having to pay Trump for violating an NDA?
If he had cut a check, and wrote "Shut your whore mouth" in the memo section, no problem.
Trump and Cohen created a shell company to handle the payment. Then they made false entries in their business records in violation of the law. They also mischaracterized the payments for tax purposes. One of the things that made this illegal is Trump agreed to pay Cohen more than the payoff amount. They increased it to $360,000 so that Cohen could characterize the payment as income on his tax returns, instead of a reimbursement. That meant Cohen could have $180,000 after paying approximately 50% in income taxes (probably a reference to federal income tax evasion that he pled guilty to).
Congress had a settlement fund (probably just a unique budget object code used to identify a transaction's purpose).. People came forward with allegations, Congressional employees investigated, and "made them whole."
This post was edited on 5/31/24 at 1:15 pm
Posted on 5/31/24 at 1:09 pm to bbvdd
quote:
Since they are absolutely federal statutes, how is it a local city DA able to bring federal charges???
The DA was not bringing federal charges. Cohen was convicted of a federal criminal offense (he pled guilty and served time for it). The Feds successfully prosecuted Cohen for it, not the local DA.
The local DA (separate jurisdiction) considered that convicted crime to be a crime. The way the local law is written, when business records are falsified to conceal another crime (a crime that still occurred in NY and the crime Cohen pled guilty to), the falsifying of business records becomes a felony.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 1:24 pm to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
You're twisting yourself into a lot of knots to defend a clearly biased judge.
Stick to provable facts kid. It'll help you make better decisions after graduation.
Good luck in life.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 2:06 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
The $130k payment to Stormy Daniels through a shell corporation was an illegal campaign contribution (to hush about something that could influence an election).
There is no evidence to support the idea that Trump tried to cover this up at all. It is reasonable to label a payment for this as "attorneys fees." There is no accounting line item for "payment to porn star."
Posted on 5/31/24 at 2:06 pm to Willie Stroker
quote:
Stick to provable facts kid. It'll help you make better decisions after graduation.
Good luck in life.
Projection.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 2:07 pm to Salviati
quote:
Second, although he lost, Trump was a candidate in the 2020 election.
You're arguing that this influenced the 2020 election?
Posted on 5/31/24 at 2:26 pm to Willie Stroker
The same guy that said he used to bury stories for Trump far before he publicly ran for President?
So the jury put more weight into a convicted perjor's testimony (who got caught lying on the stand) and a tabloid journalist saying that Trump tried to influence the election than it did in Hope Hick's testimony saying that he was trying to protect his family. And the weight was a result of the judge's extreme bias and disregard for constitutional rights. He illegally donated to Biden, his daughter made millions from Trump's political opponents, and he made a mockery of the justice system.
So the jury put more weight into a convicted perjor's testimony (who got caught lying on the stand) and a tabloid journalist saying that Trump tried to influence the election than it did in Hope Hick's testimony saying that he was trying to protect his family. And the weight was a result of the judge's extreme bias and disregard for constitutional rights. He illegally donated to Biden, his daughter made millions from Trump's political opponents, and he made a mockery of the justice system.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 5:02 pm to senshado
quote:
To find Trump guilty of felony-level falsification of business documents, the jury must unanimously find that Trump falsified the documents in order to commit or conceal a separate crime. But the jurors do not all have to agree on what that separate crime was, Justice Juan Merchan ruled.
Trump’s defense argued that, to issue a felony-level conviction, all jurors should be required to agree on the “predicate” crime.
Prosecutors initially laid out four possible predicate crimes, one of which the judge ruled out before trial. The remaining possibilities are a tax crime and violations of state or federal election law.
Defense lawyer Emil Bove argued that jurors should have to agree on a single predicate offense. But prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said the law doesn't require that.
“The importance of the case is not a basis for deviating from the standard application of the law,” Colangelo said. “There’s no reason to rewrite the law for this case.”
Merchan agreed with the prosecution and said he won't impose the requirement the defense requested.
In other words: If some jurors believe that Trump falsified business documents solely to cover up a tax crime, while others believe that he falsified business documents solely to cover up an election crime, the jury can still convict Trump on the felony-level falsifying-documents charges, despite disagreeing on the predicate crimes.
LINK
pretty hilarious on its face
jurors dont have to understand why Trump did it, or how specifically he did it or really even what specifically he did
they just have to agree he did it and that is it
Clay Travis made a great point, the jury doesnt know the full story because of Merchan’s manipulations and strange rulings on exclusions and objections. So from the jury standpoint with their instructions and the evidence they have seen, Trump no doubt looks guilty
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News